August 17, 2016

Said Trump, talking like an imitation of himself as he explains bringing in Stephen Bannon as chief executive and making Kellyanne Conway (previously his pollster) his campaign manager. Bannon comes over from Breitbart — an iffy news organization that's been fawning over Trump. Paul Manafort is pushed back, and I read these changes to mean that Trump doesn't want to hear that he needs to change, which is something Trump is going ahead and saying outright:

"You know, I am who I am," he told a local Wisconsin television station Tuesday. "It's me. I don't want to change. Everyone talks about, 'Oh, well you're going to pivot, you're going to.' I don't want to pivot. I mean, you have to be you. If you start pivoting, you're not being honest with people."

"Bannon comes over from Breitbart — an iffy news organization that's been fawning over Trump."

So what is the opposite of "iffy"? Fill us in, Coach. Who should a news organization fawn over to avoid iffiness? Obama, Clinton, or both?

Or maybe it's not who you fawn over, it's which Globalist billionaire you belong to. Carlos Slim and Jeff Bezos already own non-iffy publications. Maybe Zuckerberg could be persuaded to purchase Breitbart and remove that awful taint of iffitude?

“I don't want to pivot. I mean, you have to be you. If you start pivoting, you're not being honest with people."

…You turn into Hillary who’s evolved so much she’s back where she started.

Unfortunately for Hillary, it appears Trump is going to make truthfulness and authenticity a campaign issue. Next up, Trump starts using the word "pivot" for everything she does. Hillary has "pivoted" her hairstyle. Hillary has "pivoted" her policy positions. Hillary has "pivoted" her desire for rape victims to be believed.

@Kevin, I think that it was Matt Drudge who noticed that Hillary's latest hairstyle even looks a bit like Trump's haircut. A "pivot" indeed!

Anyway, evidence surfaced that Manafort played fast and loose with laws concerning foreign lobbying and he is demoted, probably fired if the evidence is enough to support charges. I find it refreshing after almost 7 1/2 years of Barack Obama and a seemingly infinite number of years of the Clintons that someone wealthy and important pays attention to our laws.

@Althouse, do you agree that having a presidential candidate who pays attention to the law is a good thing?

Trump is doing the right thing here. He doesn't want to turn into another McCain or Romney. If he is going down, go down with some dignity and respect for the people who voted for you in the first place. Hillary will probably win but she was always more likely to win. If she implodes, for one of the predictable reasons, then Trump is well positioned to govern without fear or favor.

Are you "iffy" if you dare publish "unapproved" stories? I would have to say that Breitbart has a higher "factual" ratio than NYT these last few years, why are they considered [in your mind] as "iffy"?

Ann, do you consider CNN, NBC, ABC, etc. as "iffy" too? I believe that Breitbart can be shown to have needed to run fewer corrections and "walk-backs" than these other "news services" over the period of time that Breitbart has been in existance. Just trying to understand where you draw the line...

"I'd like to see you, Ann, just once, describe the NYT as an "iffy" news organization. Just a whiff of elitism in that statement."

I have criticized the NYT practically every day of the 12 years of this blog. It's just about the main thing I do. It's the most important newspaper in this country and perhaps in the world. It's a big effort keeping track of the many things it does and finding the bias and the misinformation. But it damned well is an elite organization, embedding its bias within an elite format. I've put years of work into dealing with that.

Breitbart is not at the same level. It's not well established and it has never seems to have worked at earning general respect (as opposed to providing propaganda for those who wanted that form of reading). I rarely link to it because it's so bad. You'd better believe I look down my nose at it, and so should you. And I like Andrew Breitbart. I wish I could see what he would have made of the business that outlived him.

"You don't understand, Don. We coulda had class. We coulda been a real contender, pro-America first again. We coulda been somebody, what we were once before, instead of an also-ran bum, which is what we are, let's face it."

We counted on you, Don, to do it. It's not about you. It's about us; you remember us, doncha? We're the ones to be thought of first, not the government first.

I recently attended a social function at my alma mater celebrating the life of one of my retired philosophy professors. I was one of two conservatives in attendance. I was made to feel very uncomfortable.

Kudos to Ann for hosting a blog that welcomes conservative opinions and perspectives. That is a revolutionary act in Madison, Wisconsin.

Trump is doing the right thing here. He doesn't want to turn into another McCain or Romney. If he is going down, go down with some dignity and respect for the people who voted for you in the first place. Hillary will probably win but she was always more likely to win. If she implodes, for one of the predictable reasons, then Trump is well positioned to govern without fear or favor.

The GOP are not going to be happy about Bannon. It is most probably about bringing the GOP down which was going to happen eventually as Congress has been on a shutdown since 2010 because of the Republicans.

Trump is doing the right thing here. He doesn't want to turn into another McCain or Romney. If he is going down, go down with some dignity and respect for the people who voted for you in the first place.

Well said. Trump being encouraged to become someone else....generic Republican Candidate #213 is a recipe for disaster.

The old style of campaigning is over. Trump needs to change up and leave the hidebound dinosaur consultants behind.

Example:There was a Trump television ad the other day that was just awful. Had a bland male voice talking about something, lots of big buildings, yada yada yada. We thought it was a BASF advertisement and talked over it because we were, unusually for us, actually watching live. Only at the end did it say something about Trump. BOOORING. It was exactly the same canned, scripted, bland advertising done by the professional consultants. The ad was NOT reflective of Trump as seen in real life.

Trump needs to look at some of the advertisements/youtube videos that have been made by private citizens. Effective, DIFFERENT, and creative.

Trump is in this to hand it to Hillary. Even if I'm wrong - Trump is still losing badly and no amount of shake up at this point will matter. Trump is baked in the cake. People do not feel comfortable with a guy who speaks at a 6th grade level.

Trump is losing every demographic except white men.

Saying this does not make me a Hillary supporter.

All Trump needs to do to win is to hold Romney's numbers. He is falling way behind Romney. Clinton will not get Obama's numbers - and any candidate would be beating her. Face it- we chose wrong.

Ann, I think he was attacking *your* elitism, not the NYT's status as an elite newspaper, which speaks poorly about journalism in general given the NYT's record of lying. Or were you trying to pull a Hillary by deflecting from the criticism of you?

It seems like for all my life I've heard a rather constant complaint. Politicians suck. And one reason they suck is because they are fake. Bill Clinton made this an art form. He was known for sticking his finger into the air, determining which way the wind blows, and taking a position on a subject because of that.

It's disgusting. We want people to be honest with us, even if we disagree.

Along comes Trump.

He tells us he isn't going to change and now we have people saying, but, but, but, if you're going to be president, you need to change!

And the moment he changes guess what? All those people will have their new storyline. Flip flopper Trump.

It's refreshing to have someone run for office and just be themselves.

I understand why people believe "Trump only wants a 2nd place finish as a platform for X [kingmaking/media venture/whatever]".

This is all conspiracy-theory nonsense peddled mostly by those who want to defeat him. It's so obvious. He's in it to win.

AprilApple, we appreciate your contribution to making america great again, or else going out swinging. Feels good. No reason to give in to the enemy's "Correcting the Record" astroturf smears+defeatism, plus the sabotage of the GOPe who would rather maintain their kingmaking access than do anything for us.

The Donald needs to market a Trump Rorshach Test. If test takers find Trump's style to be harsh, confusing and uselessly hard to follow, then you are normal feeler type. But if you connect to him, then you are a non-empathetic, fast thinking and communicating type that is results oriented.

You could then say that exposure of the ugliness of the Clinton's Secret Corruption allied with Israel haters like Soros and America haters like Obama, is the only thing that could win this election for Trump.

"All Trump needs to do to win is to hold Romney's numbers. He is falling way behind Romney. Clinton will not get Obama's numbers - and any candidate would be beating her. Face it- we chose wrong."

He's got to do better than Romney percentage wise, but probably just close to Romney total votes wise (what with three way race and Hillary likely less votes than Obama). But he is currently short of the mark.

YES! Let Trump be Trump. Breitbart speaks the same language that the majority of Althouse readers speak. They reject the NYTs, WaPo, The New Yorker, etc. and hang on every word Breitbart belches out. Breitbart thinks like the majority of Althouse readers, so it's no surprise that they get into a snit over Althouse's rejection of their preferred news source. It's an insult to their intelligence. So Trump picking Bannon is Trump being true to himself, because he is most important to himself, just a good narcissist. I'm glad Trump has decided to reject the advice of mainstream Republicans and has at long last decided to be himself. Good move, for Democrats, we love it.

Trump has already pivoted, only it's been a natural and gradual evolution which will continue at an accelerated pace. I notice he's reading his important policy speeches and appears much more comfortable speaking with a teleprompter. I expect that as president he'll be reading speeches just like every other president does and he'll get better at it. He'll no doubt be more accessible than either Obama or Hillary Clinton. I respect that he's not an actor impersonating a president, but then I like his style.

BTW, I also notice that he's not talking about deporting millions of illegal immigrants anymore. So that's another pivot no one is mentioning.

I think a pivot back in the spring (towards more disciplined messaging, swing state focus, coalescing the conservatives and moderates and focusing on just Hillary) would have worked. We're at a point now--less than 2 and a half months til election--that any pivot won't be believable. He may as well just stick with his wild card strategy and hope some event intervenes.

Trump will be fine though--if he loses, he starts his media empire and maintains influence among his cadres. He may turn a profit on all of this.

I'm resigning myself to four or more years of Hillary in the White House. The up side is she's fairly bungling so may not do too much damage.

There are a few reasons for Trump to pivot to a more generic, responsible candidate.

1) It would likely close the gap in the polls. If current trends continue, Trump's loss is going to damage more than his own campaign. Polls that measure likelihood of voting are showing recent declines among Republicans, and that will have down ballot effects if not reversed. Trump's speech of the other day did good, but who knows how long until his next eruption.

2) It would demonstrate impulse control. It is unclear the degree to which Trump's actions are deliberate versus emotional reactions. Obviously, there is some of each. Those on the fence would be more open to support the guy if they thought "campaign" Trump was a bit of an act and that president Trump could be sober in the face of provocation.

Now if Trump really is incapable of ignoring provocation, then his best strategy is exactly what he is doing. Not pivoting at all has so far been a losing approach, but appearing to be trying to pivot and failing is far worse. Far better to declare that pivoting itself is a sign of poor character. That is intelligently making the best of the situation.

>>Breitbart is not at the same level. It's not well established and it has never seems to have worked at earning general respect (as opposed to providing propaganda for those who wanted that form of reading). I rarely link to it because it's so bad. You'd better believe I look down my nose at it, and so should you.<<

Thank you for some sanity. It's one reason I read this blog. Let me add that Breitbart is a white nationalist cesspool. I've frequented the site for a couple years now and it's more full of conjecture, speculation and conspiracy than it is news. They also don't hide their fawning worship for Trump - even trashing one of their own reporters [if you can recall]. It's one thing to be politically biased, it's another to be so far in the tank for a candidate and for a particular ideology as to lose any bearings towards seeking the truth of a particular story. Breitbart fits that bill. The fact that Trump chose Bannon proves he has no interest in outreach beyond his fans.

If Trump loses, one thing that's going to be pored over in the post-mortem is the litany of missed opportunities. While there's been high drama over every attention-getting stunt of Trump's, we're missing a lot of scrutiny over Hillary's e-mail dumps, her flip flops on trade (which should be huge with Bernie fans), or the uncomfortable questions on immigration (if they think restrictionist policies are so bad, then where do they draw the line? Would 50 million new immigrants a year be ok? How would we absorb the demand on services or the limited jobs available?), or balancing effective policing with BLM demands. There's a lot of weak points to hammer away the Clintonite coalition, and batter her ratings further down.

Maybe the next nominee will do that when she runs for re-election in 2020.

...It's the most important newspaper in this country and perhaps in the world. It's a big effort keeping track of the many things it does and finding the bias and the misinformation. But it damned well is an elite organization, embedding its bias within an elite format...

'Most important newspaper in the country...' was a big deal for a long time - now not so much. Sure, NYT is still the most important newspaper to those that either are part of or fancy themselves to be part of the academic/elitist/globalist 'in' crowd - but the rest of us raggedy old regular folks out here have largely moved on to other 'non-elite format' sources.

While it may be a big effort keeping track of the many things NYT does (although admittedly not as many as it once did and certainly now not nearly as well...), it's hardly any big effort to find the bias and misinformation in the NYT when your average middle- to high school student can do it. It certainly doesn't require a JD and/or a PhD, dear Professor.

I think Trump (rightly) sees this as new paradigm where the msm is isolated and generally vilified and social media and internet avenues will be the main communicator.

That's why the large local events, Reddit, Bannon, etc.

Polls are also not as telling as they once were. The more they are seen as marketing tools, which they are, the less weight they carry. In the social media context polls can change must faster than ever before, and the strategy is to fire at the appropriate time and get momentum for the final days.

Of course, he could lose in a blowout, I'm just saying he might be on to something.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Donald Trump's campaign chairman helped a pro-Russian governing party in Ukraine secretly route at least $2.2 million in payments to two prominent Washington lobbying firms in 2012, and did so in a way that effectively obscured the foreign political party's efforts to influence U.S. policy.

The revelation, provided to The Associated Press by people directly knowledgeable about the effort, comes at a time when Trump has faced criticism for his friendly overtures to Russian President Vladimir Putin. It also casts new light on the business practices of campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

Under federal law, U.S. lobbyists must declare publicly if they represent foreign leaders or their political parties and provide detailed reports about their actions to the Justice Department. A violation is a felony and can result in up to five years in prison and a fine of up to $250,000.

Trump shook up his campaign organization Wednesday, putting two new longtime Republican conservative strategists as chief executive officer and campaign manager. It was unclear what impact the shakeup would have on Manafort, but he retains his title as campaign chairman.

Manafort and business associate Rick Gates, another top strategist in Trump's campaign, were working in 2012 on behalf of the political party of Ukraine's then-president, Viktor Yanukovych.

I'm not aware that Manafort has done Trump any good. I am aware that the GOP rammed Manafort down Trump's throat. Hey Brando, if this is what happens when Trump takes the GOP's advice like you want him to, maybe this is why Trump doesn't take the GOP's advice all the time.

I've heard that Trump fired Lewandowski after his daughter Ivanka and her husband intervened.

"Trump's decision to fire his manager( Lewandowski) came in part at the urging of his daughter Ivanka Trump and her husband, Jared Kushner, who have powerful advisory roles in the campaign, the two people in contact with Trump aides said."

You're not carrying water for that "Manafort Russian influence" booyah, are you?

I guess you haven't been paying attention, mostly because it isn't coming down your HRC approved Jorno-List of sources, but there's that sticky-wicket of HRC & the uranium sale. Or, that business with John Podesta & the Russkies.

Here's the thing, unknown: when Russia opened up, everyone thought it was gonna be big time (remember the BRICs?). The smart money got their hooks in as fast as they could. Then the Russian economy got taken over by the oligarchs, & like oligarchs everywhere, the "Big Men" in Russia only wanted to deal with the "Big Men" in the USA. Thus, a lot of political players on both Left & Right got pulled into relationships, now seen as problematic, with an increasingly belligerent Russia.

It has nothing to do with politics, U. It has a lot to do with using politics to get access to lots of money.

"Hey Brando, if this is what happens when Trump takes the GOP's advice like you want him to, maybe this is why Trump doesn't take the GOP's advice all the time."

So you think Manafort is the one who told him to let his convention turn into a hot mess, and spend the weeks following it to go after a gold star family, ask Russia to hack his political opponent's servers to help his election, promise that Putin will not invade the Ukraine even though he's already there? If that was Manafort's advice then good riddance to him.

But like I said above, it's probably too late for him to go any other way. May as well wild card it for the next two and a half months and go down fighting.